Abstract
A comparison is made between the steric influences of a range of zinc hydrotris(pyrazolyl)borates and zinc hydrotris(thioimidazolyl)borates ([Zn(TpR)Cl], [Zn(TmR)Cl]; R = Me, iPr, Ph, tBu) by using inverse cone angle analysis. The study combines the crystallographic analysis of [Zn(TmiPr)Cl] and [Zn(TmPh)Cl] with the data previously deposited with the Cambridge Crystallographic Data Centre. Despite efforts to manipulate the reactive pocket around the metal centre in M(TmR) complexes, the incorporation of sterically confining substituents onto the framework seems to have a minimal effect at the metal centre unless the group attached is very large.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
